Retention....please do not hijack
480 RepliesJump to last post
Actually they do. They pay in the form of a reduced fee via a co-pay to be a provider for that Insuance company.Please allow me to re-phrase, so as not to be as provocative: Anyone “making” $300k is respected big-time in this business, just as doctors who “make” $300k are, which is the example used by Vet20, above, prompting my apparently incendiary response. I intended no malice toward reps in any platform. My point was, simply, that (most, anyway) doctors don’t pay a “franchise percentage to a parent “firm””, for lack of a better term.
Holy missing the point, Batman! Then, assuming you’re right, a doctor would have to generate $300k + That co-pay-to-be-part-of-the-insurance-carrier-whatever, in order to “make” $300k.
I’m really, really not looking to start a whole new argument. My point was always simply that to confuse “gross production” to what any of us “make”, on any platform, is a very, very potentially misleading position. (i.e, as it started: Comparing the perception of an FC “doing”, I think was the term, $275-$350 to a doctor who “makes” $300k is an erroneous comparison). That’s it. No offense to anyone intended.
I was mildly entertained reading the last 3 pages of this “We are ISG and we deserve respect!” versus “We are PCG/AGE and we deserve more respect!”, and then I read the title of the thread again: “Retention…please do not hijack”.
Gentlemen and ladies, this thread has been hijacked. If you want to start a new thread to discuss which channel of business you think is the coolest, please do that. If you have nothing to add to the present discussion on retention, then please show some restraint.
My sincere apologies for distracting from and interrupting serious discussion of the retention package’s announced details that everyone is keen to analyze. I and the rest of the interlopes now leave you to it.
Got to be an announcement soon. Isn’t the merger done on 12/23? I believe the announcement will be made my then.
HIJACK anyone. Thank you for bringing the topic back to earth CS. After the PC trip fiasco of late, Danny and his boys better start back pedaling and butt-kissing real soon. Unfortunately, I think Danny has very little say in this whole thing. I don't know if he knows if he really has the job (long-term). I have heard that the package will come w/o 12/15. Defered comp portion of the AGE deal, that magic 10 year invisible portion might be fronted to us now (as a 6 yr upfront loan), other retention on top will be "disappointing". I just keep coming back to the idea that Danny has very little say in this whole matter (why do you think it is sooo quite) and our New Masters will determine the shots. Apparently Danny looks quite worn down lately and is exteremly apologetic in public. Perhaps the Prince and is UBM has been taken down several notches.I was mildly entertained reading the last 3 pages of this “We are ISG and we deserve respect!” versus “We are PCG/AGE and we deserve more respect!”, and then I read the title of the thread again: “Retention…please do not hijack”.
Gentlemen and ladies, this thread has been hijacked. If you want to start a new thread to discuss which channel of business you think is the coolest, please do that. If you have nothing to add to the present discussion on retention, then please show some restraint.
Rumor has it Stumpf called Ken Lewis before he rolled out the ML/BAC retention. Topic of the conversation was a last minute plea to NOT pay a retention, period. Obviously Lewis did not agree with Stumpf. Stumpf is dead set against retention and has the opinion of ‘let them walk’. Another rumor is that the #2 in command WS guy is pushing real hard to get a retention in place. Don’t know the corporate structure of WS, but I can only assume it is the Danny guy you guys are talking about. There has been zero communication to the WFC guys.
HIJACK anyone.[quote=CommonSense]I was mildly entertained reading the last 3 pages of this “We are ISG and we deserve respect!” versus “We are PCG/AGE and we deserve more respect!”, and then I read the title of the thread again: “Retention…please do not hijack”. Gentlemen and ladies, this thread has been hijacked. If you want to start a new thread to discuss which channel of business you think is the coolest, please do that. If you have nothing to add to the present discussion on retention, then please show some restraint.
Thank you for bringing the topic back to earth CS.
After the PC trip fiasco of late, Danny and his boys better start back pedaling and butt-kissing real soon. Unfortunately, I think Danny has very little say in this whole thing. I don’t know if he knows if he really has the job (long-term).
I have heard that the package will come w/o 12/15. Defered comp portion of the AGE deal, that magic 10 year invisible portion might be fronted to us now (as a 6 yr upfront loan), other retention on top will be “disappointing”. I just keep coming back to the idea that Danny has very little say in this whole matter (why do you think it is sooo quite) and our New Masters will determine the shots. Apparently Danny looks quite worn down lately and is exteremly apologetic in public. Perhaps the Prince and is UBM has been taken down several notches. [/quote]
Disappointing?? WTF? AGE brokers have ZERO to be complaining about. They got the LARGEST retention any wire house has given brokers! Cripes… MER brokers doing under 500K got ZERO. 90% of AGE brokers do less than 500K. They got paid 18 months ago and are potentially going to get paid again and you say that is “disappointing” WTF???
Eleven weeks later…rumor is that Danny has the job and an announcement is coming Monday. All communication from management has been positive. WFC is aware that the brokerage unit is in need of standard retention. ISG and PCG will both get industry standard deals very big producer biased, but not so harsh on the middle of the pack like MER and BAC. The complications come from the amount of money already received by AGE and even the smaller amount rec’d by WS PCG brokers. An industry deal announced next week will subtract any EFL balance…If you are a new hire, there will most likely be a cuttoff on retention like the MER deal…ie 2006 or after.
Either way, the time that has passed is an indication the the priority this has had with WFC. Next week is the week it needs to be done. With retention that is less than the industry standard, tied to the 10-11 weeks we've been waiting will speak to the future of the NEW firm. Anything beyond that, I will assume we are screwed. It will be a complete disregard to us as we all try and salvage a sense of relief and peace and enjoy a few days for the holidays. Instead we will be forced to make tough decisions as deals to go other firms have expiration dates. Instead of eggnog, we will be preparing protocol lists for the acats.I truly don't think ISG will get a larger retention than PCG. I guess we will see. Regarding my bud, I never said bank reps can't make it at the wirehouse. What I said was most bank reps couldn't make it at the wirehouses (prior to joining the bank) and were left with the bank as their only option. Regarding my bud, I don't think he'll blow himself up. He has an LOS of 3 years and is already doing $350k. He told me the referrals that the bank provides is the main reason he was doing so well He wasn't penalized for being a bank rep by his new firm and was given a nice upfront package. I guess he wanted to cash in on his low LOS. His new firm said he was in the 1st quintile for his LOS. He never worked at a wirehouse before. I've been helping him put together a business plan. Told him that he's responsible from bringing in his own clients now. He understands. He's going to do two seminars a month after he tries to bring over some of his clients. He's admitted that most of his clients probably won't come over b/c of their relationships witht he bank and that he's pretty much starting over.ISG is being recognized up the chain of command and you will see us get the retention and quite possibly the largest package of the 3. Now if you thought ISG guys couldnt cut it at the wirehouse, why did you let your best bud just blow himself up by going there?
All I have to say is misery loves company. We get it. You are independent and you berate everyone else who isn't. I will never go independent. I've crunched the numbers. First, the 90% payout on fee based business is a sham. Most independents charge the fa anywhere from 25-75bps on the value of assets that you receive zero payout on. the 90% is on the remainder. So, it's more like 65% payout.[quote=ryedog123][quote=YHWY]Wirehouse brokers “making” $300k are respected big-time in this business. The difference is, they need to produce @$750 in revenue to “make” that $300k. Those damn “payouts” from gross commission.
What???
Say you charge 1.25% on a mutual fund wrap program. In PCG, we receive say 40% on the entire amount. However, within FiNet, we would have to pay 35bps to the house with the remainder (.90%) receiving the 85-90% payout. That's why I said it's actually more like a 65% payout on advisory fees. Second, I don't mind the firm keeping more of my payout in exchange for providing the infrastructure, paying the light bills, paying my assistant, all of my state registrations, state insurance licenses, providing opportunities for continuing ed, etc...
Hard to argue with someone who is happy paying his firm $250,000 + to cover $50,000 in expenses for him. You could be right. However, too many indy reps focus on cutting costs instead of increasing gross. 100% of my time is spent focusing on growing my business. I don't think that would be the case if I was indy. Third, the average indy rep produces jack. For example, the average LPL advisor produces $175k.
If you are a big producer in a wirehouse, you will be a big producer as an independent. True as long as I'm not spending most of my time paying the utility bills or managing my employees. Fourth, the net payout is the virtually the same when you take into account all costs. For example, an indy has to pay 12.4% FICA tax versus 6.2% as a wirehouse rep (the firm pays the other half).
True, if you're doing under $100,000. Also, FICA is only paid on the first $102,000 of income.
That is true. My point is that the 90% payout at finet and the 40% payout at PCG are not apples to apples comparisons. Fifth, I like the professional and social aspect of the branch environment. We have a friendly competition with each other. We hang after work. We enjoy ourselves.
That's a valid point and should be considered before going indy. At least I was right on one point. Just kidding.
In our branch we figured it out that you should go indy if you are a $1million+ producer because your fixed expenses will then represent a small enough percentage for it to make sense. That is probably the reason PCG created the Profit Formula channel to allow high end PCG reps to earn a higher payout and keep them from going indy. Also, you need to buy your own building instead of paying rent to yourself. Ironically, most indy reps are low producers who continue to rent their space and spend most of their time on these forums berating wirehouse reps b/c they aren't indy. Telling them they aren't true business owners. When in reality, they want everyone else to be as miserable as they are. If I was so happy about my decision, I could care less what other people chose. MISERY LOVES COMPANY![/quote][/quote]
All I have to say is misery loves company. We get it. You are independent and you berate everyone else who isn't. I will never go independent. I've crunched the numbers. First, the 90% payout on fee based business is a sham. Most independents charge the fa anywhere from 25-75bps on the value of assets that you receive zero payout on. the 90% is on the remainder. So, it's more like 65% payout.[quote=Hank Moody] [quote=ryedog123][quote=YHWY]Wirehouse brokers “making” $300k are respected big-time in this business. The difference is, they need to produce @$750 in revenue to “make” that $300k. Those damn “payouts” from gross commission.
What???
Say you charge 1.25% on a mutual fund wrap program. In PCG, we receive say 40% on the entire amount. However, within FiNet, we would have to pay 35bps to the house with the remainder (.90%) receiving the 85-90% payout. That's why I said it's actually more like a 65% payout on advisory fees. Second, I don't mind the firm keeping more of my payout in exchange for providing the infrastructure, paying the light bills, paying my assistant, all of my state registrations, state insurance licenses, providing opportunities for continuing ed, etc...
Hard to argue with someone who is happy paying his firm $250,000 + to cover $50,000 in expenses for him. You could be right. However, too many indy reps focus on cutting costs instead of increasing gross. 100% of my time is spent focusing on growing my business. I don't think that would be the case if I was indy. Third, the average indy rep produces jack. For example, the average LPL advisor produces $175k.
If you are a big producer in a wirehouse, you will be a big producer as an independent. True as long as I'm not spending most of my time paying the utility bills or managing my employees. Fourth, the net payout is the virtually the same when you take into account all costs. For example, an indy has to pay 12.4% FICA tax versus 6.2% as a wirehouse rep (the firm pays the other half).
True, if you're doing under $100,000. Also, FICA is only paid on the first $102,000 of income.
That is true. My point is that the 90% payout at finet and the 40% payout at PCG are not apples to apples comparisons. Fifth, I like the professional and social aspect of the branch environment. We have a friendly competition with each other. We hang after work. We enjoy ourselves.
That's a valid point and should be considered before going indy. At least I was right on one point. Just kidding.
In our branch we figured it out that you should go indy if you are a $1million+ producer because your fixed expenses will then represent a small enough percentage for it to make sense. That is probably the reason PCG created the Profit Formula channel to allow high end PCG reps to earn a higher payout and keep them from going indy. Also, you need to buy your own building instead of paying rent to yourself. Ironically, most indy reps are low producers who continue to rent their space and spend most of their time on these forums berating wirehouse reps b/c they aren't indy. Telling them they aren't true business owners. When in reality, they want everyone else to be as miserable as they are. If I was so happy about my decision, I could care less what other people chose. MISERY LOVES COMPANY![/quote][/quote] [/quote]
Managing employees is much easier as an indy that as a wirehouse broker. They know that we can actually fire them, unlike sales assistants who can make broker's lives miserable. Been there, done that.
I've been indy for over 5 years and have never written a check for a utility bill. I have written rent checks, though. It takes one minute per month.
QUOTE: Disappointing?? WTF? AGE brokers have ZERO to be complaining about. They got the LARGEST retention any wire house has given brokers! Cripes… MER brokers doing under 500K got ZERO. 90% of AGE brokers do less than 500K. They got paid 18 months ago and are potentially going to get paid again and you say that is “disappointing” WTF???[/quote]
Just some news, some of you have probably already seen this.
Wells Fargo & Co. has selected an internal candidate to run its wealth-management group instead of a Wachovia Corp. executive based in Winston-Salem.
According to a company memorandum obtained by the Winston-Salem Journal yesterday, Wells Fargo has named Jay Welker, the head of its wealth-management group, as the president of the combined group.
The decision, according to analysts, may not bode well for Wachovia’s wealth-management operations in Winston-Salem and its 600 local employees. Stanhope Kelly, the president of Wachovia’s wealth-management division, is the company’s highest-profile executive based in Winston-Salem.
Wells Fargo’s plans for wealth management have received considerable scrutiny from some analysts who consider Wachovia’s platform as better overall.
The memo sent by David Carroll, the recently named head of Wells Fargo’s wealth, brokerage and retirement-services group, says that Kelly will remain with Wells Fargo “in a leadership position and will help with the transition.”
“We thank Stan for his leadership, his passion and his dedication in building Wachovia Wealth Management into the firm it is today,” Carroll said.
Of the five top officials reporting to Carroll, three are from Wells Fargo and two from Wachovia – John Papadopulos, named as the president of the retirement-services group, and Danny Ludeman, chosen as the president of the brokerage group.
“Looks like Wachovia got brokerage, one of the crown jewels here, and retirement services, a big move up in the corporate hierarchy,” said Tony Plath, a finance professor at UNC Charlotte.
“Wells Fargo is taking wealth, the other crown jewel. As expected, Wells Fargo is taking business services, which I suspect is the back-office-support side of the wealth-management unit,” Plath said.
“That’s the scary part for Winston-Salem, since this is the part that’s in charge of the data center and the wealth/brokerage operations business that’s big in the Triad,” he said.
Wachovia has about 2,900 local employees, including 1,134 in wealth management and general banking, and 1,433 in information technology. The employment number does not include local branch employees, who are not expected to be affected by the integration since Wells Fargo doesn’t have any branches in Winston-Salem.
In other Wachovia news, The Charlotte Observer reported yesterday that Wachovia will pay an average of 20 percent of what employees may have expected from bonuses this year. The bank said that there will be differences based on individual performance.
< ="-" =“text/; =utf-8”>< name=“ProgId” =“Word.”>< name=“Generator” =“Microsoft Word 10”>< name=“Originator” =“Microsoft Word 10”><>
Just a thought -- Wells Fargo, as I understand it, traditionally
takes a long time to make any move. This is an odd situation because the
AGE guys were already paid. How much do you pay them now? Should
you pay WS more? Do you even pay ISG? We're talking billions - at
the same time they have to come up with a new name and have some testing done
on it before they announce it --
BAC had a much easier series of decisions - mainly what to pay one group of
brokers and they didn't pay that much. In other words, I wouldn't read we're getting
screwed into the delay.
I believe if you have an all upfront deal with a five year promissory note -
the retention should be very good. Remember the deferred part of many of
the deals was twenty to thirty percent at a minimum. Combining that with
upfront part - and scaling back the total 10% or so, well it should be
acceptable anyway.
As for the bank brokers exclaiming how good they are, let me draw a quick picture for you: It's like having
someone drive a boat out into the ocean - catch several dozen fish for you - skin
them - clean them - prepare them and then give them to you all on a silver platter
and then calling yourself an expert fisherman.
You're a bank clerk that got a promotion! So they should go get all the
clients for you and then pay you extra for the privilege of earning income from
all of their work and advertising? You won the lottery and just have clients led to you with hundreds of thousands each to invest and then you want a bonus on top of it?
I don't mean any offense but please, be serious.
Have heard from multiple sources at Wells that the attitude is No Retention. Maybe they cave in and do a little, but as of two weeks ago Zero was the planned retention.Rumor has it Stumpf called Ken Lewis before he rolled out the ML/BAC retention. Topic of the conversation was a last minute plea to NOT pay a retention, period. Obviously Lewis did not agree with Stumpf. Stumpf is dead set against retention and has the opinion of ‘let them walk’. Another rumor is that the #2 in command WS guy is pushing real hard to get a retention in place. Don’t know the corporate structure of WS, but I can only assume it is the Danny guy you guys are talking about. There has been zero communication to the WFC guys.
Actually i m hoping that there annouce no retention which make my decision to transition to UBS much easier. Why would anyone from a business sense leave a 240 percent package if there is no retention from wells. my prod has gone from 350k last year to 550k this year so just hoping for no retention. wells got all the deposits, the losses for tax benefit from wachovia buyout and now they want my business for free? I dont think so.
Your thoughts are self indulging. My guess is you could not catch a fish if one were put on a hook for you.
If it is so easy and less than being an advisor in a bank, you should consider making the move. I have been in both. The top brokers in ISG and PCG are on the same level. The pikers(like i suspect you ar) in PCG and ISG, also on the same level. The skills needed in a bank brokerage are a little different then pcg. Management skills and establishing yourself as a leader make that distribution channel better business model than 40 guys in an office bs'ing eachother waiting for the next resignation and hoping to inherit free assets. If a pcg guy comes to ISG and is a team player, works well with partners in bank, the odds of success is good. If a PCG guy comes and claims to be an expert fisherman(like you), he will starve.